Why the study?
Does IL-4c administration improve cardiac function and reduce infarct size in mice following myocardial infarction?
Does IL-4c administration improve cardiac function and reduce infarct size in mice following myocardial infarction?
IL-4c administration provides proof-of-concept for augmenting reparative cardiac macrophages to improve cardiac function and tissue repair after acute myocardial infarction.
IL-4c timing may influence post-MI macrophage therapy in mice; leaves open human translation and requires prospective trials before any clinical consideration.
Recent research has shown that reparative (alternatively activated or M2) macrophages play a role in repair of damaged tissues, including the infarcted hearts. Administration of IL-4 is known to augment M2 macrophages. This translational study thus aimed to investigate whether IL-4 administration is useful for the treatment of myocardial infarction. Long-acting IL-4 complex (IL-4c; recombinant IL-4 mixed with anti-IL-4 monoclonal antibody as a stabilizer) was administered after coronary artery ligation in mice. It was observed that IL-4c administration increased accumulation of CD206⁺F4/80⁺ M2-like macrophages predominantly in the injured myocardium, compared to the control. Sorted cardiac M2-like macrophages highly expressed wide-ranging tissue repair-related genes. Indeed, IL-4c administration enhanced cardiac function in association with reduced infarct size and enhanced tissue repair (strengthened connective tissue formation, improved microvascular formation and attenuated cardiomyocyte hypertrophy). Experiments using Trib1 -/- mice that had a depleted ability to develop M2 macrophages and other in-vitro studies supported that these IL-4-mediated effects were induced via M2-like macrophages. On the other hand, when administered at Day 28 post-MI, the effects of IL-4c were diminished, suggesting a time-frame for IL-4 treatment to be effective. These data represent proof-of-concept of efficacy of IL-4 treatment for acute myocardial infarction, encouraging its further development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shintani et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: